|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 12, 2020 0:46:55 GMT
Fr. Hewko gives a wonderful sermon on the error of Sedevacantism - explaining and reminding how Archbishop Lefebvre always refused to usurp the authority of the Church's Magisterium by personally passing judgement on the Conciliar popes.
The 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia tells us the This is why no "lay armchair theologian" nor "Father X,Y, or Z" can make declarations on who is Pope and who is not. This is one of the fundamental errors with the sedevacantist theories, including the resignationist theory.
Archbishop Lefebvre allowed for the possibility that one day these popes may be declared not to have been popes or that their teachings may very well be reversed, their new Rites reversed, etc. but he always reminded us that it is up to the Church's Magisterium to make these pronouncements. Not even he - an Archbishop of the Church - with certainly more authority than any one of us, refrained from making such declarations. Sedevacantism begins in anarchy and ends in anarchy.
God bless Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre for always thinking and acting as the Church thinks and acts! Let us imitate his prudent and humble example and beg Our Lord and Our Lady to guide us through these treacherous days, where 'even the elect may be deceived'!
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 12, 2020 13:18:48 GMT
Most of us know that the prudence of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was such, that in these times of terrible assaults against the Faith, he never took upon himself an authority he did not have.
He strongly condemned the errors and heresies spawned in Vatican II by his words and actions. He did this by his words in giving sermon after sermon, conference after conference, and writing book after book, explaining how these errors rose up against the teachings of the true Catholic Church. He did this also by his actions when he erected the SSPX as a structure to counter those Conciliar errors, and the "reforms" that issued from them, to help ensure the perpetuance of the traditional Priesthood from which a flood of graces would flow.
But he did not claim the pope was not the pope. He simply said 'it is not for me to decide, the Church must decide.' This position is one that took great courage and even greater humility. Many souls are tempted to want to solve the problems afflicting us now. They do not want to practice the patience required in waiting for the Church to eventually condemn these evil popes. Instead, they rather usurp an authority they do not have and themselves declare this one is not a pope for this reason or that one is not a pope for another reason. This is anarchy disguised as piety, an angel of darkness masquerading as an angel of light.
One of the greatest and most eloquent rebuttals to the sedevacantist error comes from Our Lady Herself. For even Our Lady of Fatima recognizes and "waits" for the Church's Magisterium!
At Fatima She requested the solemn public Consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart by the Pope and all the Catholic bishops of the world. The Pope in union with bishops of the world is the Church's Magisterium!
If Our Lady is 'forced' to wait for the Consecration of Russia until that time when there is a good Pope on the Throne of St. Peter, can we do any less? Are our individual needs and desires for a resolution to this Conciliar mess more important than Our Lady's request for the Consecration of Russia? Have we not been taught from our earliest days to imitate Her in Her virtues, particularly Her humility, which was so pleasing to the Blessed Trinity?
Dear friends, we are all struggling to hold onto 'the Faith of our Fathers, our Holy Faith.' Let us do so by fervently uniting ourselves to Our Lady and imitating Her sweet virtue of humility. It is this humility that Archbishop Lefebvre imitated and with it for his guide, he continues to guide us now. May we all be found faithful - clinging to the true Church, in Her true teachings, Her true Traditions, Her true Sacraments, and Her true Holy Mass.
* * *
St. Bernard - Homily on the Praises of the Virgin Mother
... To this city the angel Gabriel was sent from God. To whom? To a Virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph." Who is this Virgin so reverently saluted by the angel? and so lowly as to be espoused to a carpenter? Beautiful commingling of virginity with humility! That soul is in no small degree pleasing to God, in Whom humility commends virginity, and virginity adorns humility. But how much more worthy of veneration is she, in whom fecundity exalts humility, and child-bearing consecrates virginity. Virginity is a commendable virtue, but humility an indispensable one. The first is of counsel, the latter of precept. Of the one it is said, "He that can take, let him take it." [St. Matt. xix. 12.] Of the other, "Unless you become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." [St. Matt, xviii. 3] To the one reward is offered: the other is exacted under a threat. Again, we can be saved without virginity, not without humility. A soul that has to deplore the loss of virginity may still be acceptable to God by humility: without humility, I will venture to say that even the virginity of Mary would not have been pleasing to Him, the Divine Majesty.
Upon whom shall my spirit rest, if not on him that is humble and peaceable?"[Isa. xl. 2.] He says not on the virgin, but on the humble. If, therefore, Mary had not been humble the Spirit would not have rested on her. If the Holy Spirit had not rested on her, she would never have become fruitful; for how without Him could she have conceived of Him? Therefore, as she herself testifies, in order that she might conceive of the Holy Ghost, God the Father "regarded the humility of his handmaid," [St. Luke i. 48.] rather than her virginity. And if by her virginity she was acceptable to Him, nevertheless, it was by her humility that she conceived Him. Hence it is evident that it was her humility that rendered even her virginity pleasing to God.
A proud virgin, what can you say? Mary forgets herself and her virginity, and glories only in her humility, and you, neglecting humility, presume to pride yourself on your virginity. She says: " He hath had regard to the humility of his hand maid." And who is this handmaid? A holy virgin, a prudent virgin, a devout virgin. Are you more chaste than she? Are you more devout? Is your purity more pleasing than the chastity of Mary, that without humility, you deem it sufficient for you, when without humility her virginity could not find favour? The more honourable the gift of chastity, the greater the injury you do it in tarnishing its beauty within you by any admixture of pride. It would have been better for you not to be a virgin than to be puffed up and grow insolent by virginity. Virginity is not for all; it is for the few; and there are few among the few that unite humility with virginity. Wherefore, if you can only admire the virginity of Mary without being able to imitate it, study to copy her humility, and it will be sufficient for you. But if with virginity you possess humility, then you are great indeed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 13, 2020 14:06:47 GMT
A brief reminder... Taken from the Catechism of Pope St. Pius X - On the Ninth Article of the Apostles Creed
The Church Teaching and the Church Taught
38 Q. Is there any distinction between the members of the Church?A. There is a very notable distinction between the members of the Church; for there are some who rule and some who obey; some who teach and some who are taught.
39 Q. What do you call that part of the Church which teaches?A. That part of the Church which teaches is called the Teaching Church.
40 Q. What do you call that part of the Church which is taught?A. That part of the Church which is taught is called the Learning Church, or the Church Taught.
41 Q. Who has set up this distinction in the Church?A. Jesus Christ Himself has established this distinction in the Church. 42 Q. Are the Church Teaching and the Church Taught, then, two churches?A. The Church Teaching and the Church Taught are two distinct parts of one and the same Church, just as in the human body the head is distinct from the other members,and yet forms but one body with them. 43 Q. Of whom is the Teaching Church composed?A. The Teaching Church is composed of all the Bishops, with the Roman Pontiff at their head, be they dispersed throughout the world or assembled together in Council. 44 Q. And the Church Taught, of whom is it composed?A. The Church Taught is composed of all the faithful. 45 Q. Who, then, are they who possess the teaching power in the Church?A. The teaching power in the Church is possessed by the Pope and the Bishops, and, dependent on them, by the other sacred ministers.
46 Q. Are we obliged to hear the Teaching Church?A. Yes, without doubt we are obliged under pain of eternal damnation to hear the Teaching Church; for Jesus Christ has said to the Pastors of His Church, in the persons of the Apostles: "He who hears you, hears Me, and he who despises you,despises Me." 47 Q. Besides her teaching power has the Church any other power?A. Yes, besides her teaching power the Church has in particular the power of administering sacred things, of making laws and of exacting the observance of them. 48 Q. Does the power possessed by the members of the Hierarchy come from the people?A. The power possessed by the Hierarchy does not come from the people, and it would be heresy to say it did: it comes solely from God.
49 Q. To whom does the exercise of this power belong?A. The exercise of this power belongs solely to the Hierarchy, that is, to the Pope and to the Bishops subordinate to him. |
|
